[Dark_crow]

You're fighting the last war--the one over whether sodomy laws are constitutional. That war is over, and your side lost, sorry.

THIS debate is about whether citizens who are not lawbreakers can be denied the right that other citizens have to enter into binding legal contracts that protect their property and family rights, solely on the basis of their private, and now legal, sexual behavior.

As I pointed out to Excon, it is about law and not rights. Laws are written and sometimes rescinded and one day my side, as you put it, may yet again prevail.

Sodomy laws were overturned and a right to privacy prevailed; but that is a far cry from legalizing sodomy i.e. “slosh around in each others excrement.”:o

[Dark_crow]

excon
Do our tax laws protect everyone equally…not in my opinion? So just what does EQUAL protection under the law mean? Well, as I understand it we may be hearing from the Supreme Court on it.

[Synnen]

Out of curiosity--do "good Christians" have sex for pleasure and not procreation?

Because seriously--that's the REAL debate here: whether a sexual act can produce offspring, not whether it's "dirty". By your definition, ORAL sex between partners should be bad too--and having sex any time on a woman's period, or basically using birth control.

If sex for pleasure is okay, then why can't ANY sex for pleasure be okay?

[ordinaryguy]

As I pointed out to Excon, it is about law and not rights.

Of course it's about rights. What else are laws for if not to protect and enforce rights?

Laws are written and sometimes rescinded and one day my side, as you put it, may yet again prevail.

Perhaps, but until then, sodomy is not against the law.

Sodomy laws were overturned and a right to privacy prevailed; but that is a far cry from legalizing sodomy i.e. “slosh around in each others excrement.”:o

No, it is not a far cry from legalizing sodomy. That's what "overturned" means--laws that forbid it are invalid and unenforceable. However much you despise it, and however grossly you characterize it, sodomy is now legal behavior. Nobody can be arrested and prosecuted for it. Get over it.

[Dark_crow]

You missed the distinction between natural rights and government granted rights. A key aspect of this intellectual tradition is the notion that natural rights are not created by government but exist anterior to it and that governments are in fact created to “secure these rights.” My contention was and is, is that there is no natural Right for two men to slosh around in each others excrement.

But hay, if it suits you and the majority what can I say. The ruling by the court did not specifically write a law that said this sloshing around was legal; it is still of course illegal except in privacy.

[Fr_Chuck]

Well actually sodomy is still on the laws of many states as illegal, but merely not allowed to be enforced because of current supreme court ruleings. The reason these states leave the laws on the books, but not they can not be enforced, so that if the courts ever rule they can enforce them, they will already be in place and on the books.

And of course there is no natural right for homosexual activity, and there is no constitutional rights even under the US constitution.

[ordinaryguy]

My contention was and is, is that there is no natural Right for two men to slosh around in each others excrement.

Contend as much as you like. Natural or not, it is no longer an illegal act.

The ruling by the court did not specifically write a law that said this sloshing around was legal

Courts don't write laws, that's the legislature's job. Courts determine the validity and enforceability of laws, and in this instance, they ruled that the law is invalid and unenforceable.

it is still of course illegal except in privacy.

Sure, having sex in public is illegal no matter who does it or what is sloshed around in, which of course has nothing whatever to do with the topic under discussion.

You seem to be really fixated on this "sloshing around in excrement" terminology. Does that mean you're OK with lesbian or other homosexual acts that don't involve anal penetration? Are you equally incensed by heterosexual couples that do it? Do you think they should be denied the right to marry as well?

[ordinaryguy]

And of course there is no natural right for homosexual activity

Whether it's a "natural" right or not is immaterial. It is not illegal, and nobody can be arrested and prosecuted for it.

and there is no constitutional rights even under the US constitution.

On the contrary, the U.S. Constitution guarantees the rights of equal protection under the law, and due process of law to EVERYONE.

[JoeCanada76]

Whatever you mean by "natural" and whether you think homosexuality is or isn't such, the point is that homosexuality is no longer illegal. People who commit homosexual acts are not breaking the law. So there is no legal basis for denying them the right that the rest of us have to enter into binding and enforceable legal contracts to protect their property and family rights. If it makes you feel better to use a different word to refer to their contracts, I doubt that most of them would care, as long as the legal effect is the same.

The fact is that Marriage is meant to be between a man and a women. That is a fact.

Gay marriage, well if they want to live common law that is their choice. As far as Marriage the fact remains that Church marriage, Religion marriage is about a man and a women coming together in a family unit. To create a family unit for future generations. Nothing can change that. Not even wording.

[Fr_Chuck]

Yes due process, they get the rights to sue and the rights to our courts.

As for as equal protection, yes, they can marry someone of the other sex anytime they want. There is no special protetion for them What they want is extra and special rights, They are not listed as a protected right.
In fact is is not politically correct ( and thank God I am not) but to speak the truth about such relastionships is also a right, to free speech.

And as was mentioned, while I see the morals of american going down quickly, so I doubt that homosexually will be illegal ever again, but I can hope and pray that America would turn from its sin, before God turns from America

[Wondergirl]

I don’t believe most Christians would agree that “Good Christians” engage in sloshing around in excrement.

What cave have you been hiding in?

[jillianleab]

a crime against humanity

Yes, gay sex is certainly on par with genocide, apartheid, forced sterilization, slavery, torture...

All on the same page in my book!

:rolleyes:

[Fr_Chuck]

Yes, gay sex is certainly on par with genocide, apartheid, forced sterilization, slavery, torture...

All on the same page in my book!

:rolleyes:

So true, it is part of a whole that is lowering society to unknow levels of human destruction.

[Fr_Chuck]

It has been requested that the post be closed.